Texas Electric Dereg Subject of PBS Report

Inside E Street, a Public Broadcasting System program featured on more than 200 TV stations nationwide, has begun airing a new segment. It’s main focus: electric deregulation in Texas.

PBS cites data showing electric prices in

deregulated Texas consistently above national average.

“Over the past ten years, the average retail price of Texas electricity has consistent exceeded the national average,” noted Inside E Street host Lark McCarthy, citing federal data. The veteran newscaster also identified new challenges for residential consumers.

Texas is among about 15 states with deregulated retail electricity markets. The intent is that electric companies compete in these markets and free-market forces keep a lid on prices and improve service. But as experts on the PBS report noted, technological and economic barriers unique to electric power can make deregulation a difficult proposition.

Geoffrey Gay

For instance, electricity — unlike other commodities — cannot be stored. This means that under deregulation consumers can become captive to volatile price swings. And because electricity is essential to the public welfare, dips in reliability or increases in price can cause serious hardships.

“The focus of the original deregulation effort was to get lower prices — and that has not worked well,” said Geoffrey Gay, general counsel for the Texas Coalition for Affordable Power. Interviewed for the PBS segment, the Lloyd Gosselink principal also noted that comparison shopping under Texas deregulation can be difficult. “I’ve been dealing with utility business for 33-plus years, and I have found personally the options available very confusing,” he said.

TCAP and other consumer organizations have advocated for the creation of standard-offer products to make apples-to-apples shopping easier. Under the proposal, retail electric providers would offer products with standardized terms and conditions along with their other electricity deals. These deals would be listed at the state-sponsored powertochoose website. But under heavy industry lobbying, lawmakers have yet to embrace the reform.

“For many folks, especially for the elderly and the poor, going to the powertochoose website (to shop for electricity) can be an incredibly intimidating process,” said Gay.

You can click here to watch the entire Inside E Street segment.To learn more about standard-offer products, go here.

Price supports for deregulated electric companies?

Last year was hot. We have to go all the way back to 1789, searching through the tree ring records, to find evidence of a drier summer. And because power plants depend upon water in order to operate properly, the high heat wreaked havoc on the transmission grid. As lake levels dropped, our risk of blackouts increased.

Next week a key committee in the Texas Senate will hold a public hearing on reliability issues and the drought. There will be plenty of expert testimony, public comments, white board charts and maybe a few reporters. A representative from ERCOT, the operator of the Texas power grid, will make a presentation. The chairwoman of the Texas Public Utility Commission also will address the senators.

If the drought is putting system reliability at risk, then what should be done about it? Some have proposed artificial price supports for wholesale energy. That is, some believe that without bigger profit margins for big electric companies, those companies won’t have sufficient financial incentives to build needed generation plants. But consumer groups are discouraging efforts to intentionally increase prices — especially when there’s no clear pay-off in terms of reliability. Any money used to enrich these deregulated generation companies ultimately comes from the pockets of ratepayers. But generation companies offer no guarantees that they’ll resolve or even address the state’s reliability concerns.

It’s a tough issue to be sure, and one that’s begun to attract welcome attention from the media. Both the Texas Observer and National Public Radio’s Impact Texas recently have weighed in, with both outlets noting that Texans are at risk for paying higher electricity prices. Reports in the Texas Tribune and the San Antonio Express-News also help to frame the debate. The hearing, to be conducted by the Committee on Business and Commerce, begins at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, January 10^th. You can find a link to the Business and Commerce Committee website here. Separately, the House State Affairs Committee also is expected to consider these issues during a meeting on Feb. 9th. Both hearings will be conducted in Austin.

-- R.A. Dyer

Electricity

Texas Market Still Not Matching Pre-Dereg Levels

Here’s the good news. The most recent federal data from the United States Energy Information Administration shows that residential electricity prices in Texas have dipped below the national average. That means Texans are saving on their electric bills, at least in comparison to the rest of the nation.

Now, comes the bad news: relative to the rest of the nation, Texans received a better deal before we deregulated our electricity markets.

According to the federal data, Texans so far this year have paid electricity rates that are 2.59 percent below the national average. But in 1999, the year the state legislature adopted the retail electric deregulation law, we Texans got an even better deal — paying 7.48 percent less than the national average. The same was true in 1998, when we paid 7.38 percent less; and in 1997, when we paid 7.24 percent less.

In fact, during the entire decade prior to the adoption of the deregulation law, Texans paid residential electricity rates that were 6.4 percent lower than the national average. In the decade since deregulation took effect, Texans paid 8.72 higher than the national average.

Some may note that in Texas there exists areas both with and without deregulation, and that the state’s higher-than-necessary average prices shouldn’t be blamed on deregulation, but rather on prices paid by those living outside deregulation. According to this argument, inflated prices paid by Texans living outside deregulation have skewed calculations for average prices overall.

But here again, the federal data shows this assertion to be incorrect. Data from the US EIA shows that Texans living in areas outside deregulation paid consistently less than the national average for residential service and consistently less than Texans subject to deregulation. This is true for every year in which data exists to make a comparison. You can check out the graph, above, showing the pricing data for the years 2002-2009.

A recent analysis by the Texas Coalition for Affordable Power shows that all these high prices don’t come without consequences. The total estimated cost to the Texas consumer economy from these long years of above-the-national-average electricity prices exceeds $15 billion.

-- R.A. Dyer

Eventful Week for the Power Grid: nuke shutdown, price spikes, new usage record

The South Texas Project: "human error" apparently caused the partial shutdown of the nuclear reactor on Friday.

It’s been an eventful few days for the Texas power grid. Since last week, prices have spiked in the wholesale electricity market, one of the units of a major nuclear plant tripped off due to “human error,” and Texans broke another record for energy usage. Given the comparatively high electric prices already paid by Texans and concerns over continuing problems with the deregulated market, the developments merit examination.

Here they are, in no particular order:

*On Monday, wholesale electricity that more typically sells for less than $30 per megawatt-hour spiked to more than $2,000. That’s an increase of more than 7,000 percent. Prices also spiked several times to the $1,000 level. A price spike for $2,200 is especially startling, given that the regulatory cap is set at $2,250. That is, the wholesale prices legally could not have gone much higher. In most other jurisdictions the caps are set no higher than $1,000 per megawatt hour.

*According to the organization that manages the power grid, the Electric Reliabiilty Council of Texas, a new record for statewide power use was set on Monday. It was the fourth new usage record in as many weeks. ERCOT reported that the new record was broken at about 4 p.m., when demand spiked to 65,715 megawatts. The usage spike came just as the spot market price was spiking to $2,200 — probably not a coincidence.

*Unit 1 of the South Texas Project apparently tripped off on Friday. The event, first reported in a trade journal SNL Power Daily, was apparently caused by human error. “The NRC said in its Aug. 23 event report that the unit experienced an automatic reactor trip that was caused by an inadvertent turbine signal initiated during testing,” reported SNL's Jay Hodgkins, citing the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The publication reported that power was restored by Monday. It’s unclear whether the outage contributed to the price spikes, although that seems likely.

*In response to the loss of a major unit on Friday, ERCOT activated the first stage of its emergency response procedure to prevent blackouts. That means that some industrial consumers that previously agreed to have interruptible service lost their power. It was the third time this year that ERCOT has gone to that stage of its emergency response procedures. The major unit that went down was probably the nuke (as referenced in the SNL Energy article) although ERCOT won’t say for sure. That's because such a disclosure would violate ERCOT's rules for competitive information.

The developments are unsettling, especially given that wholesale prices tend to trickle down to residential consumers. A dysfunctional wholesale market can lead to higher home lighting bills. Already Texans pay more than consumers in Oklahoma, Louisiana and Arkansas. Prices also remain higher than the national average. Prior to deregulation, Texans paid below the national average.

-- R.A. Dyer

A Tale of Two Cities: Houston and San Antonio

Here’s a bit more bad news about prices under the state’s flawed deregulated system. According to recent figures from the Public Utility Commission web site, residents in the state's largest city under deregulation (Houston) continue paying far more for electricity than residents living in the largest city outside deregulation (San Antonio).

Specifically, the PUC figures show that as of December 2009 (the latest data available) a home consumer in San Antonio would spend $77.38 for 1,000 KW/H of power. A consumer using the exact same amount of juice in Houston -- even a consumer with the very lowest rate available -- would spend $86, or more than 11.1 percent more. And, of course, most rates in Houston are far higher.

Likewise, a recent survey from a commercial website, Whitefence.com, lists Houston as having the second highest electricity prices among the cities it surveyed in the entire nation.

Many proponents of the flawed deregulated system continue making apples-to-oranges comparisons between lowest-cost offers under deregulation and average rates outside deregulation. But as these figures show, even those comparisons often don't hold water.

-- R.A. Dyer

Consumer workshop scheduled for Houston

May 15th – mark it on your calendar. That’s the date of a public workshop scheduled in Houston devoted specifically to consumer rights under the state’s electric deregulation law. Sponsored by state Rep. Sylvester Turner, the first annual “Consumer Rights Electricity Workshop” will provide a forum to discuss products, pricing, social services and cost-cutting measures. Turner’s office also promises discussions “on consumer rights, (on) how to effectively advocate for policy changes, and … of important electricity issues the state will face in the 2011 legislative session.”

When it comes to electricity issues, the 2011 session should be a contentious one. That’s because both the Public Utility Commission and the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, which operates the power grid, are now both under special legislative review. At the same time, residential electricity consumers continue to pay rates above the national average after enjoying a long history of below-average rates before deregulation.

Rep. Turner’s consumer workshop is tentatively scheduled for 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. at the CWA Union Hall in Houston. The address is 1730 Jefferson Street. For more information contact Cory Henrickson in Rep. Turner's office. His email address is cory.henrickson@house.state.tx.us.

-- R.A. Dyer

Third Court of Appeals: Split Decision for Consumers on Stranded Costs

In a split decision for consumers, the state’s Third Court of Appeals this month has ruled that certain utility interest payments should not be used to increase the calculation of stranded costs in Texas, but also that certain federal tax benefits for utilities should not reduce them. The ruling, which was issued Jan. 15 by the court, is in response to a case brought by consumer groups relating to the allocation of stranded costs above $5 billion.

Recall that stranded costs are meant to represent the difference between the book value of a company’s assets and the price that would be paid by someone buying the assets on the open market. Think of a company that pays $1 billion to build a nuclear power plant under regulation, but then can only sell it for $500 million in a deregulated market. In this oversimplified example, the $500 million difference would be the “stranded cost” of the nuclear power plant.

The Texas deregulation law allowed utilities to seek reimbursements for stranded costs as part of the transition to deregulation. During a series of separate ruling over the years, the Public Utility Commission has found that CenterPoint, Texas Central Company and Texas-New Mexico Power were owed around $6 billion in combined stranded costs.

The Texas deregulation law included special allocation provisions for stranded costs if they were found to exceed $5 billion statewide. The case before the Third Court of Appeals relates to what proportion of those costs above $5 billion should be allocated to industrial customers for payment, and what proportion should be allocated to residential and commercial customers. The court largely upheld the PUC’s previous rulings with regards to these issues.

Other specifics about the decision this month: the Third Court held that the Public Utility Commission was correct to order a retroactive reconciliation of stranded costs already collected, and that it was appropriate to apply a 5% interest rate for the securitization of stranded costs. The case was brought by the Office of Public Utility Counsel (which represents commercial and residential consumers) and a trade group known as Texas Industrial Energy Consumers. It remains unclear whether either party will appeal to the Texas Supreme Court.

-- R.A. Dyer

Coalition: deregulated prices remain higher

Average electric rates paid in deregulated states are 55 percent higher than average rates in regulated ones — and that gap is widening, according to a coalition of public interest groups calling this month for congressional action.

In a joint statement released in Washington, the American Public Power Association, Public Citizen and other groups said that Congress and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission should investigate how high electricity prices impact low-income consumers. It said that while customers in all states feel the pinch from high electricity prices, it’s been those in deregulated states who get the worst deals.

“While consumers continue to struggle to pay their electricity bills, the deregulated markets serving about two-thirds of the country continue to create opportunities for excessive profits for a handful of companies that own generating plants,” the coalition noted in its Nov. 3 release.

Besides the APPA and Public Citizen, the group includes the National Consumer Law Center, The Utility Reform Network, the Public Utility Law Project of New York and the Virginia Citizens Consumer Counsel. The groups cited survey data showing the percentage of low-income households forced to sacrifice food in order to pay for electricity had increased by 70 percent since 2003, and the percentage of low income consumers foregoing medical or dental care in order to pay for utility bills had more than doubled.

In Texas, average residential rates remained below the national average for a decade or more before deregulation, and then have remained above the national average after competition. Recent reports also show that even the lowest cost offers in deregulated areas of Texas can’t match regulated rates elsewhere.

-- R.A. Dyer

Penalizing customers for exercising their power to choose?

One of the few pro-electric consumer bills to emerge from the 2009 Legislative session was House Bill 1822, by state Rep. Burt Solomons. The legislation called for the establishment of common terms on utility bills and also included an important requirement that retail electric providers always print on bills the end date of multi-month contracts. This second requirement (it was part of an amendment by state Sen. Wendy Davis of Fort Worth) was to meant to reduce consumer headaches when it comes to the length of term contracts and the assessment of early termination penalties.

The Public Utility Commission is now considering how best to implement HB 1822 and has taken up recommendations from several parties. Some retail electric providers have expressed discomfort with the specific end-date provision of HB 1822, arguing instead for permission to print a more general description of the termination date. Consumer groups have argued that this would contradict the clear, black-letter language of HB 1822. PUC staff members also have argued against this REP recommendation.

A second important point of discussion involves penalties for early termination of contracts. PUC staff has argued (and consumer groups agree) that once customers receive notification that their fixed-rate contracts are about to expire, that those customers should not also be dinged with early termination penalties if they switch providers. This would address an inconsistentcy in timing requirements in PUC rules. That is, under current rules, REPs must send out notices of contract expiration 30-60 days in advance, but can still charge early termination penalties up until 14 days before the end of a contract.

That means that under current rules, REPs can punish fixed-rate customers who, upon receiving notice that their contract is about to expire, immediately sign up with a competitor. Conversely REPs can waive early termination penalties for those customers who, upon receiving notification that their contract is about expire, agree instead to lock in another long-term deal with the original REP.

Either way, this increases customer “stickiness” in the Texas electricity market. Consumer groups believe this disconnect between the timing of contract expiration notices and the timing of penalties reduces the ability of customers to exercise their power to choose, thereby lessening the downward pressure on prices that can come from competitive forces.

The PUC is expected to take up rules for HB 1822 during a meeting on Friday.

-- R.A. Dyer